AOC Gets Owned in Twitter Exchange

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I'd rather see working class people in congress than the privileged rich. That's the way things were designed to work. The founders were farmers and tradesmen. Revere was a silversmith. Franklin, a publisher, Adams a farmer, Washington a surveyor and militia officer. The rich members were Southern planters. The founders would all hate the professional politicians running the country today. Like Lincoln, legislators were supposed to come the D.C., serve a term, sacrificing to represent their neighbors and go home.

I don't think he intended to do that, unless you are talking about his one term in the House.

 

[Red Front]

Rep. Dan Crenshaw Responds To Ocasio-Cortez’s ‘Cried In The Back’ Tweet, Receives Pushback

Texas Rep. Dan Crenshaw has come under fire for his response to a tweet from New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez about her working-class background.

dailycaller.com

Let's go straight to the tweets

This is so sweet:




Here it comes:




Sweet.

Republican Texas Rep. Dan Crenshaw has come under fire for his response to a tweet from Democratic New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez about her working-class background.

Ocasio-Cortez tweeted Thursday that Republican Senators “sit around on leather chairs all day,” while she had to work a “physically difficult working class job” prior to taking office.

Ocasio-Cortez later clarified her comments in a tweet Friday night, saying they were directed at Republicans who “mock” her history in the service industry.

Ryan Saavedra, reporter at the Daily Wire, shot back at Ocasio-Cortez, tweeting that Republicans like Crenshaw have “lost limbs for this country while AOC cried in a refrigerator because she got an order wrong.”

Crenshaw jokingly responded that “one of the hardest decisions” he ever had to make while serving in Afghanistan was “still or sparkling?”

Crenshaw, a former Navy SEAL who lost his eye during an IED blast, furthered his criticism of Ocasio-Cortez’s tweet Saturday while at a campaign event for Republican Georgia Sen. David Perdue, saying that Democrats are controlled by people like her “who believes that the biggest hardship in life was figuring out whether it was still or sparkling.”

And here comes the usual leftwing play-the-victim garbage:

Twitter users were quick to jump on Crenshaw for his comments, with former Democratic Houston Mayor Annise Parker saying Crenshaw’s comments were “mocking the honest work of those who are trying to put food on their own tables.”

He has plenty of government healthcare. So what's your silly point? I have VA benefits and I had surgery not that long ago at the VA. Great healthcare. So it's a bit ironic that you would see his comment as debunking anything. I often come across Republicans who have government-provided or funded healthcare, either in the form of VA benefits or Medicare, who are against their fellow Americans having access to healthcare. The irony and hypocrisy of that is mindblowing.

 

[AZrailwhale]

I was. That's why I used him as an example. I was being lazy and didn't want to do research.

 

[rightwinger]

I'd rather see working class people in congress than the privileged rich. That's the way things were designed to work. The founders were farmers and tradesmen. Revere was a silversmith. Franklin, a publisher, Adams a farmer, Washington a surveyor and militia officer. The rich members were Southern planters. The founders would all hate the professional politicians running the country today. Like Lincoln, legislators were supposed to come the D.C., serve a term, sacrificing to represent their neighbors and go home.

A twisted view of history

Our founders were aristocrats, among the wealthiest in America.
Washington was one of our wealthiest Presidents

They did not even trust poor people with the vote

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

He has plenty of government healthcare. So what's your silly point? I have VA benefits and I had surgery not that long ago at the VA. Great healthcare. So it's a bit ironic that you would see his comment as debunking anything. I often come across Republicans who have government-provided or funded healthcare, either in the form of VA benefits or Medicare, who are against their fellow Americans having access to healthcare. The irony and hypocrisy of that is mindblowing.

View attachment 668384​

People in the military worked for their benefits just like you did, and most people on Medicare paid into the program all of their working life. So there's no hypocrisy there. There's a difference between getting something from government that you earned and getting something from government for nothing.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

They did not even trust poor people with the vote

And today we see why.

 

[struth]

Her basic point is basically right but not inclusive enough. Neither party cares about the working class.

she makes absolutely no point…and your post is mere projection

 

[Red Front]

People in the military worked for their benefits just like you did, and most people on Medicare paid into the program all of their working life. So there's no hypocrisy there. There's a difference between getting something from government that you earned and getting something from government for nothing.

We only take out of the system what we put in? That's not how it works. Medicare, SS is not like a savings account that you start withdrawing from when you're older. If anyone is paying for what the recipients of these social programs are receiving, it's those who are working now. The current workforce is paying for the Medicare and Social Security of those who are receiving it now. Assuming that anyone is paying for it, because once you understand how our economy and the monetary system works, you realize that the only reason we pay into the system, is to maintain the value of the dollar and get some money out of the economy. It's a way of keeping inflation down, more than it is a means to fund the government. The federal government doesn't need funding, it creates the currency. The budget constraints of the federal government are defined by our GDP, not how much money is being paid in taxes.

It's still quite ironic if not hypocritical to be against universal healthcare coverage for all Americans when you have access to government-run or funded healthcare. No matter how you cut it. I served a few years in the army, but does that automatically give me the exclusive right to free (at the point of service) healthcare, for the rest of my life? Well yes, if society decides to grant me that right. I served a long time ago, in the early 90s, but I now get government-run healthcare, forever. Wow great, how about everyone else? We could do it, no problem.

More, I thought the government can't do anything correctly. Right? Isn't that what the right-wingers tell us? Government can't do anything right, only private business enterprises can do anything correctly. Well, the US government is doing healthcare quite well, at the VA. I get the benefit of having a primary care physician. I get check-ups regularly that I otherwise would probably not have had if I didn't have the VA. Why do only I and other veterans have this, while all other Americans are consigned to poor health? Not having access to the healthcare they need? I see universal healthcare as an investment in our nation's public health. The return on our investment is 100-fold. Society can decide that all Americans are worthy of having healthcare, in virtue of their humanity and citizenship.

We have the resources to do it, those who claim otherwise are either ignorant or lying.

 

[Flash]

Neither would Trump so I guess that's not all that important.

Neither did Potatohead, The Worthless Negro or Slick Willy.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It's still quite ironic if not hypocritical to be against universal healthcare coverage for all Americans when you have access to government-run or funded healthcare. No matter how you cut it. I served a few years in the army, but does that automatically give me the exclusive right to free (at the point of service) healthcare, for the rest of my life? Well yes, if society decides to grant me that right. I served a long time ago, in the early 90s, but I now get government-run healthcare, forever. Wow great, how about everyone else? We could do it, no problem.

More, I thought the government can't do anything correctly. Right? Isn't that what the right-wingers tell us? Government can't do anything right, only private business enterprises can do anything correctly. Well, the US government is doing healthcare quite well, at the VA. I get the benefit of having a primary care physician. I get check-ups regularly that I otherwise would probably not have had if I didn't have the VA. Why do only I and other veterans have this, while all other Americans are consigned to poor health? Not having access to the healthcare they need? I see universal healthcare as an investment in our nation's public health. The return on our investment is 100-fold. Society can decide that all Americans are worthy of having healthcare, in virtue of their humanity and citizenship.

We have the resources to do it, those who claim otherwise are either ignorant or lying.

What do you mean we have the resources to do it, what resources? We are 30 trillion in the hole now. What happens when we can no longer pay the interest on our debt? That's right, the country goes bankrupt and many of these programs will cease to exist.

Benefits are earned, not given to people. You didn't get rich serving in the military, but the benefits are pretty good. It's just like government workers, their pay scale in most jobs is comparable to the private sector, but you can retire over ten years earlier than workers in the private sector. Again, it's a benefit that attracted you to the job. It was agreed upon before you made your decision to join the military.

The government has tried to get as much control over the people as they could. They've been pretty successful so far. The two entities they haven't mastered are healthcare and energy. Once they get control over those two sectors, they will have total control over the people. The SC decision on vaccines is a perfect example. They ruled that Dementia could not force private companies to make sure their employees are vaccinated or take weekly tests, BUT, he can make that mandate for healthcare facilities. Why healthcare facilities? Because they are funded by government in many cases. Now, what would their decision have been if we all were under government healthcare? They could decide all people who are against the vaccine must get it since healthcare is provided by the government. In fact they'd have the power to control every thing we do in life.

Fat in Japan? You're breaking the law. - The World from PRX

As the health care debate rages in the US, Tokyo lawmakers set a maximum waist size. Are you too fat for Japan?

theworld.org

Obese patients and smokers banned from routine surgery in 'most severe ever' rationing in the NHS

Obese people will be routinely refused operations across the NHS, health service bosses have warned, after one authority said it would limit procedures on an unprecedented scale.

www.telegraph.co.uk

And don't say that can't happen here.

 

[Red Front]

What do you mean we have the resources to do it, what resources? We are 30 trillion in the hole now. What happens when we can no longer pay the interest on our debt? That's right, the country goes bankrupt and many of these programs will cease to exist.

Benefits are earned, not given to people. You didn't get rich serving in the military, but the benefits are pretty good. It's just like government workers, their pay scale in most jobs is comparable to the private sector, but you can retire over ten years earlier than workers in the private sector. Again, it's a benefit that attracted you to the job. It was agreed upon before you made your decision to join the military.

The government has tried to get as much control over the people as they could. They've been pretty successful so far. The two entities they haven't mastered are healthcare and energy. Once they get control over those two sectors, they will have total control over the people. The SC decision on vaccines is a perfect example. They ruled that Dementia could not force private companies to make sure their employees are vaccinated or take weekly tests, BUT, he can make that mandate for healthcare facilities. Why healthcare facilities? Because they are funded by government in many cases. Now, what would their decision have been if we all were under government healthcare? They could decide all people who are against the vaccine must get it since healthcare is provided by the government. In fact they'd have the power to control every thing we do in life.

Fat in Japan? You're breaking the law. - The World from PRX

As the health care debate rages in the US, Tokyo lawmakers set a maximum waist size. Are you too fat for Japan?

theworld.org

Obese patients and smokers banned from routine surgery in 'most severe ever' rationing in the NHS

Obese people will be routinely refused operations across the NHS, health service bosses have warned, after one authority said it would limit procedures on an unprecedented scale.

www.telegraph.co.uk

And don't say that can't happen here.

You apparently don't know how the economy works. Our debt is simply a ledger or record of how much money is being saved and invested in treasury bonds. The federal government's so-called debt is the wealth of the people, it's how much money is available in the economy.

​

Right now we spend more on healthcare than any other nation on Earth and we don't have the best outcomes. Our life expectancy is one of the lowest in the industrialized world, we have some of the highest rates of cancer and heart disease on the planet. We would save money if we established a universal healthcare system, whether through Medicare or a government run healthcare service. The private sector could still exist, but providing people with access to publicly run hospitals or Medicare coverage would greatly improve our nation's health and cut costs.

As far as your comments on energy. It's always better when we nationalize heavy industries that are vital to our nation's infrastructure. The profits go into the public treasury rather than into a billionaire's private checking account.

 

[Red Front]

Is America #1 where it matters?

​

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Right now we spend more on healthcare than any other nation on Earth and we don't have the best outcomes. Our life expectancy is one of the lowest in the industrialized world, we have some of the highest rates of cancer and heart disease on the planet. We would save money if we established a universal healthcare system, whether through Medicare or a government run healthcare service. The private sector could still exist, but providing people with access to publicly run hospitals or Medicare coverage would greatly improve our nation's health and cut costs.

As far as your comments on energy. It's always better when we nationalize heavy industries that are vital to our nation's infrastructure. The profits go into the public treasury rather than into a billionaire's private checking account.

Healthcare companies would not still exist. How could they exist if they only had a few customers instead of millions?

The reason healthcare is so expensive in the US is because our doctors and nurses are the highest paid in the world. I'm a patient at the world famous Cleveland Clinic. When you go to their downtown campus, you're the one who feels like the foreigner. The other reason is government. Medicare and Medicaid typically pay only 2/3 of the bill for their patients. Not a big deal for an office visit, but how about a 150K surgery? They recoup these losses by increasing prices on the private sector. That's why when you see health facilities close down, it's usually in lower income areas where there are few private pay or private insured patients. Most of them are government patients and there is no place to recoup those losses.

Life expectancy is not based on what type of healthcare system we have. We are the fattest people on the planet. We get the least exercise. We have a high murder rate especially among younger Americans. Our drug problem is out of control. We lost over 100,000 Americans last year alone to OD deaths. Our women go to college and after graduation, put off starting a family until their college loans are paid off. The later a woman has a child, the higher rate of birth defects and still borns are likely.

Government doesn't do anything right, and you think they would do wonders with energy? Look at what's happening today because people were stupid enough to elect an anti-energy President. We're paying over twice as much for gasoline than we did when we had a pro-energy President like Trump in charge. It fueled our inflation rate, our grocery prices, goods and services. If government had total control over energy, they could force you to use a thermostat that has limits on how high or low you cold keep your home. No thank you.

 

[Soupnazi630]

He has plenty of government healthcare. So what's your silly point? I have VA benefits and I had surgery not that long ago at the VA. Great healthcare. So it's a bit ironic that you would see his comment as debunking anything. I often come across Republicans who have government-provided or funded healthcare, either in the form of VA benefits or Medicare, who are against their fellow Americans having access to healthcare. The irony and hypocrisy of that is mindblowing.

View attachment 668384​

No one is against people having access to health care.

Government health care is not necessary to ensure access and in fact reduces wuality of health care,

People are against redistribution of wealth through government for substandard health care.

 

[Soupnazi630]

You apparently don't know how the economy works. Our debt is simply a ledger or record of how much money is being saved and invested in treasury bonds. The federal government's so-called debt is the wealth of the people, it's how much money is available in the economy.

​

Right now we spend more on healthcare than any other nation on Earth and we don't have the best outcomes. Our life expectancy is one of the lowest in the industrialized world, we have some of the highest rates of cancer and heart disease on the planet. We would save money if we established a universal healthcare system, whether through Medicare or a government run healthcare service. The private sector could still exist, but providing people with access to publicly run hospitals or Medicare coverage would greatly improve our nation's health and cut costs.

As far as your comments on energy. It's always better when we nationalize heavy industries that are vital to our nation's infrastructure. The profits go into the public treasury rather than into a billionaire's private checking account.

We would make thinsg worse with univeral health care.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No one is against people having access to health care.

Government health care is not necessary to ensure access and in fact reduces wuality of health care,

People are against redistribution of wealth through government for substandard health care.

Think of all the medical breakthroughs we wouldn't have had if we were under a government system. We wouldn't be able to afford the research.

I'm a retired truck driver. Up north I ran into a lot of Canadian drivers here. I always tried to get a healthcare conversation going with those drivers. The younger drivers told me they love their healthcare system. You go in, get care, and don't have to worry about bills. The older drivers advised me to fight against getting their system of healthcare, or we'll be very sorry once we get older.

Our northern border hospitals are loaded with Canadian patients who can't get care in their country so they come here. Nobody wants to be doped up for several months to escape pain because they can't get treated for weeks and months at a time. And I'd like anybody to show me a country with a healthcare system that has no flaws or problems just like we have. You get what you pay for as the old saying goes.

 

[pknopp]

Neither did Potatohead, The Worthless Negro or Slick Willy.

OK?

 

[Red Front]

Healthcare companies would not still exist. How could they exist if they only had a few customers instead of millions?

The reason healthcare is so expensive in the US is because our doctors and nurses are the highest paid in the world. I'm a patient at the world famous Cleveland Clinic. When you go to their downtown campus, you're the one who feels like the foreigner. The other reason is government. Medicare and Medicaid typically pay only 2/3 of the bill for their patients. Not a big deal for an office visit, but how about a 150K surgery? They recoup these losses by increasing prices on the private sector. That's why when you see health facilities close down, it's usually in lower income areas where there are few private pay or private insured patients. Most of them are government patients and there is no place to recoup those losses.

Life expectancy is not based on what type of healthcare system we have. We are the fattest people on the planet. We get the least exercise. We have a high murder rate especially among younger Americans. Our drug problem is out of control. We lost over 100,000 Americans last year alone to OD deaths. Our women go to college and after graduation, put off starting a family until their college loans are paid off. The later a woman has a child, the higher rate of birth defects and still borns are likely.

Government doesn't do anything right, and you think they would do wonders with energy? Look at what's happening today because people were stupid enough to elect an anti-energy President. We're paying over twice as much for gasoline than we did when we had a pro-energy President like Trump in charge. It fueled our inflation rate, our grocery prices, goods and services. If government had total control over energy, they could force you to use a thermostat that has limits on how high or low you cold keep your home. No thank you.

Ray writes:

Healthcare companies would not still exist. How could they exist if they only had a few customers instead of millions?

Response:

Not that I care about the private, for-profit medical industry, but at least in transition to a communist economy, we would have a socialist one with perhaps a private medical sector. It could offer services to the rich or those who want a service that is not readily available by government-run hospitals. Cosmetic surgery, different types of procedures that may not be available in public hospitals and clinics could be offered by private companies. Private hospitals and clinics could offer services with reasonable insurance plans that could prove very competitive and appealing to a large number of people. Private medical services would by default become much more affordable due to the fact that they would be competing with free government medical services. So to compete with that, you would have to offer exceptional quality healthcare that would convince people to pay you a monthly premium or a flat fee for your services.


Ray writes:

The reason healthcare is so expensive in the US is because our doctors and nurses are the highest paid in the world.

Response:
Overpaid. If you became a doctor to become a millionaire, you're in the wrong profession. You should've majored in international marketing, export-import , banking-finance, accounting, business administration, anything but medicine. People are most vulnerable when they're sick hence it is immoral to make private profits, monetary gain the bottom line when you're offering medicalcare, due to the danger of abuse. There's a dangerous conflict of interest, when people are making money out of you being sick.

Ray writes:

I'm a patient at the world famous Cleveland Clinic. When you go to their downtown campus, you're the one who feels like the foreigner. The other reason is government. Medicare and Medicaid typically pay only 2/3 of the bill for their patients. Not a big deal for an office visit, but how about a 150K surgery? They recoup these losses by increasing prices on the private sector.


Response:

Assuming we need a private for-profit, medical industry, there's no reason for prices to be so high. The government can very easily tell these companies they can't charge more than a certain amount for such services. Healthcare can be considered a vital service to the public and a question of national security (public health is extremely important), hence the private medical industry's pursuit of profits can't undermine people's access to medical care. Prices have to be affordable in medicine, or medical providers shouldn't be allowed to conduct business.

Ray writes:

That's why when you see health facilities close down, it's usually in lower income areas where there are few private pay or private insured patients. Most of them are government patients and there is no place to recoup those losses.

Response:

Your metric for setting prices is based on greed, not operational expenses. If investors demand a certain return that is not being satisfied then that can lead to the closure of the hospital. It's almost always the case that the facility is closing not because it's unable to operate but rather due to the unreasonable demands of capitalists.


Ray writes:

Life expectancy is not based on what type of healthcare system we have. We are the fattest people on the planet. We get the least exercise. We have a high murder rate especially among younger Americans. Our drug problem is out of control. We lost over 100,000 Americans last year alone to OD deaths. Our women go to college and after graduation, put off starting a family until their college loans are paid off. The later a woman has a child, the higher rate of birth defects and still borns are likely.

Response:

It's quite naive of you to suggest life expectancy doesn't factor in access to healthcare. When people have easy access to healthcare, they get regular checkups and diagnose diseases early, before they become deadly and expensive. If people are uninsured, they can't afford to go to the doctor and don't get the medical care they need until they're seriously ill.


Ray writes:

The government doesn't do anything right, and you think they would do wonders with energy?

Response:

That's a silly comment. The government does a hell of a lot, right. The government is a social apparatus, organized by the people to manage their large-scale, socioeconomic, civil affairs and projects. It's not inherently good, nor is it inherently evil, it's whatever we want it to be. The rich and powerful, the ruling elite, always try to take control of the government, eliminating as much democracy as possible. They invest heavily in demonizing government as an institution because they recognize that it is the arm and power of the people. The power of the populace is a democratic government. Either you are of the capitalist, wealthy class, that hates government and does everything possible to corrupt and control it, or you're a brainwashed working-class person who has drunk the capitalist's Kool-Aid.

Here in America, we are the citizens of the Empire. The workforce here is the aristocracy of labor. We are the primary, prioritized, prime, paying consumers. So we had in the past, and even now (despite of all of the damage that has been done to the American working-class in the last 40 years), a higher standard of living than workers in the third world.
We are the main consumer and exploiter nation hence we have it good compared to the consumed and exploited nations. Even though rare, the chances of a person becoming a member of the wealthy, capitalist elite in this country is higher than it is in places like Mexico or Costa Rica. So the American working class has been bombarded with so much propaganda from its capitalist employers/lords, that it defends its own slavery.

We aspire to become lords ourselves, rather than aspiring to just put food on our table and have a roof over our heads. That's not enough for us, we aspire for more. More for us isn't to pull together and collectivize our labor, and resources, working together to build our community, our nation. We rather focus on the private, personal accumulation of mammon. Money. We have a money fetish. We want to become like our capitalist lords. That's supposedly the only solution to our scarcity, we are told by capitalists. We should aspire to become like them, reducing everything to money. Profits. No, we don't need a private medical industry capitalizing on our infirmities. It's just not a good idea. We can organize healthcare in a more effective and compassionate way than what we have now under our current system.


Ray writes:
Look at what's happening today because people were stupid enough to elect an anti-energy President. We're paying over twice as much for gasoline than we did when we had a pro-energy President like Trump in charge. It fueled our inflation rate, our grocery prices, goods and services. If government had total control over energy, they could force you to use a thermostat that has limits on how high or low you cold keep your home. No thank you.

Response:

If a democratic government nationalizes the energy sector, it would be publicly owned, unlike what we have today, where private companies are pocketing all of the profits. All of that money is going into the pockets of a few billionaires. Why allow that? I prefer that money in the public treasury, where it's available to be used for healthcare, education, our national infrastructure..etc. That is our commonwealth, it belongs to the American people, not to a few billionaires. Who's the real patriot here? I want my fellow Americans to have all of that wealth and power, whereas you want a few billionaires to pocket all of that money. Hmmmm???? That just doesn't seem right.

The private sector invests heavily in a certain type of technology and it then lobbies politicians to maintain our nation dependent upon that technology even when it's obsolete. We could very easily build molten salt nuclear reactors throughout our country, providing us with all of the electricity and liquid fuel we would ever need, but due to our energy being held hostage by billionaires, we are stuck with old, dirty, nasty technology. Oil and gas, fossil fuels, are completely obsolete, we don't need it anymore. MSRs would meet all of our energy needs. Did Trump ever tell you that?

 

[flacaltenn]

I'd rather see working class people in congress than the privileged rich. That's the way things were designed to work. The founders were farmers and tradesmen. Revere was a silversmith. Franklin, a publisher, Adams a farmer, Washington a surveyor and militia officer. The rich members were Southern planters. The founders would all hate the professional politicians running the country today. Like Lincoln, legislators were supposed to come the D.C., serve a term, sacrificing to represent their neighbors and go home.

That's true. But when AOC comes into the same class of intellect as ANY of those founders you mentioned I get "Shook" -- just like AOC discovering that plants grow from seeds and running to Instagram to spread the news.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

That's true. But when AOC comes into the same class of intellect as ANY of those founders you mentioned I get "Shook" -- just like AOC discovering that plants grow from seeds and running to Instagram to spread the news.

Of when she learned of why that motor noise was coming out of her kitchen drain.